The five permanent members behaviour toward the ICC: A comparative study of how the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council justified their voting behaviour in resolution 1593 and 1970

Gatjetjiladze, Sofia

University West, Department of Economics and IT, Divison of Law, Economics, Statistics and Politics.

Tomaszewska, Magdalena

University West, Department of Economics and IT, Divison of Law, Economics, Statistics and Politics.

Abstract [en]

The aim of this thesis is to describe the five permanent (P5) members’ justifications, and compare their justifications with different voting behaviour in resolutions 1593 and 1970. In previous studies regarding the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), International Criminal Law, and UNSC and International Criminal Court (ICC), there is a lack of comparative research on the P5 members voting behaviour towards the ICC. Thus, a study of justifications on the voting behaviour fills the existing gap. This thesis use the theoretical approach of Logic of Appropriateness (LoA) and Logic of Consequences (LoC). This study is comparative and data is collected from resolutions from the official website of the United Nations. Further, the method of analysis is qualitative textual analysis. The results of this study are that LoA describes the P5's behaviour with justifications on the basis of justice, cooperation and humanitarian concern. Both China's and the US’s behaviour on the other hand can be described with LoC where sovereignty norms, cooperation and security are emphasised. Further, the P5's behaviour in resolution 1970 are also described by LoA with similar justifications, whereas France and Russia's behaviour on the other hand are also described by LoC. The change in the voting decision is described by the logics with the change of behaviour which in resolution 1593 is based on sovereignty norms and security, and in resolution 1970 is based on norms, humanitarian concern and cooperation. This result shows that the P5 members’ behaviour is based on both LoC and LoA, it is recognised in justifications that the voting behaviour is described by the two logics in the resolutions.